Back to EUR-Lex homepage

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

Back to EUR-Lex homepage

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Use quotation marks to search for an "exact phrase". Append an asterisk (*) to a search term to find variations of it (transp*, 32019R*). Use a question mark (?) instead of a single character in your search term to find variations of it (ca?e finds case, cane, care).
Search tips
Need more search options? Use the Advanced search
You are here

Document 62019TN0839

Case T-839/19: Action brought on 10 December 2019 – Koopman International v EUIPO – Tinnus Enterprises et Mystic Products Import & Export (Fluid distribution equipement)

OJ C 45, 10.2.2020, p. 89–90 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

10.2.2020   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 45/89

Action brought on 10 December 2019 – Koopman International v EUIPO – Tinnus Enterprises et Mystic Products Import & Export (Fluid distribution equipement)

(Case T-839/19)

(2020/C 45/75)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Koopman International BV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: B. van Werven, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Tinnus Enterprises LLC (Plano, Texas, United States) and Mystic Products Import & Export, SL (Badalona, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the design at issue: Tinnus Enterprises

Design at issue: European Union design No 1431 829-0002

Contested decision: Interim Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 September 2019 in Case R 1006/2018-3

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

—

annul the contested decision to suspend the appeal proceedings before the Board of Appeal and decide that said proceedings before the Board of Appeal shall continue;

—

to join the current case before the General Court with the cases before the General Court in cases R 1008/2018-3, R 1005/2018-3, R 1010/2018-3 and R 1009/2018-3 lodged by Koopman International simultaneous with this action;

—

order Tinnus Enterprises to pay Koopman International’s costs and fees.

Pleas in law

—

The Board of Appeal failed to correctly assess and apply the criterion of ‘legal certainty’;

—

The Board of Appeal failed to correctly assess and apply the criterion of ‘economy of proceedings’;

—

The Board of Appeal failed to correctly assess and apply the criterion of ‘sound administration’;

—

The Board of Appeal did not correctly balance the interests of all parties.
Top